gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 15:58:16 -0000
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)

RJack <address@hidden> writes:

> On 8/8/2010 12:07 PM, ZnU wrote:
>>
>> Basically, to argue that the Jacobsen v. Katzer reasoning doesn't
>> apply to the GPL, you'd need to argue that there was some
>> _additional_ factor relevant to the GPL that somehow undermined its
>> use of the same language that was held to create a condition
>> precedent in Jacobsen. What might that factor be?
>>
>
> The Artistic License is not the General Public License.
>
> What you *will never admit to* is that the phrase "provided that"
> omits the preposition "before" as in "provided that before".

What you will never admit to is that judges have a brain rather than a
linguistic computing circuitry which will brown out according to your
fantastic theories shoestringed together along the lines of your wishful
thinking.  Legal documents are not word games.

-- 
David Kastrup


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]